On Nov 1, 6:21*pm, Andy Walker wrote:

* * * * The calculating skills of [eg] Newton and Gauss are indeed
very impressive. *What then surprised me was the primitive state of
numerical analysis at the time, despite the existence of Newton's
and Gauss's methods all over the place.
--
Andy Walker,
Nottingham.

Newton's method indeed !,they couldn't stand the Ra/Dec generated
clockwork solar system on which Isaac built his agenda as it left no
room to study anything else but they couldn't work out what method
Newton used to make it appear that predictive elements within Ra/Dec
transfer to experimental sciences and they didn't really care.Once it
was possible to get a mathematician to admit this but not after the
early 20th century -

"The demonstrations throughout the book [Principia] are geometrical,
but to readers of ordinary ability are rendered unnecessarily
difficult by the absence of illustrations and explanations, and by the
fact that no clue is given to the method by which Newton arrived at
his results" Rouse Ball 1908

Newton's agenda is like modeled global warming,it answers any question
you care to ask and precious few people have comprehended the horror
when so much is answered by so little,one of the best commentaries was
by Edgar Allan Poe which in someway mirrors the comments of Rouse Ball
in an expanded way -

"To explain: — The Newtonian Gravity — a law of Nature — a law whose
existence as such no one out of Bedlam questions — a law whose
admission as such enables us to account for nine-tenths of the
Universal phænomena — a law which, merely because it does so enable us
to account for these phænomena, we are perfectly willing, without
reference to any other considerations, to admit, and cannot help
admitting, as a law — a law, nevertheless, of which neither
theprinciple nor the modus operandi of the principle, has ever yet
been traced by the human analysis — a law, in short, which, neither in
its
detail nor in its generality, has been found susceptible of
explanation at all — is at length seen to be at every point thoroughly
explicable, provided we only yield our assent to —— what? To an
hypothesis? Why if an hypothesis — if the merest hypothesis — if an
hypothesis for whose assumption — as in the case of that pure
hypothesis the Newtonian law itself — no shadow of à priori reason
could be assigned — if an hypothesis, even so absolute as all this
implies, would enable us to perceive a principle for the Newtonian law
— would enable us to understand as satisfied, conditions so
miraculously — so ineffably complex and seemingly irreconcileable as
those involved in the relations of which Gravity tells us, — what
rational being could so expose his fatuity as to call even this
absolute hypothesis an hypothesis any longer — unless, indeed, he were
to persist in so calling it, with the understanding that he did so,
simply for the sake of consistency in words?" Edgar Allan Poe

We inherit a highly dysfunctional system and mathematicians couldn't
care less or at least the ones I have encountered and it is now pretty
obvious that people here are trying to discuss mathematical things as
though they were astronomical things but recently jargon has overtaken
an semblance to real astronomical objects and their effects.